TOPLUMSAL CİNSİYET ALGISI BAĞLAMINDA KAMU KURUMLARINDA İSTİHDAM EDİLEN MEMUR VE İŞÇİLERİN EBEVEYNLİK KAYNAKLI İZİN HAKLARINA İLİŞKİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR DEĞERLENDİRME
Yükleniyor...
Tarih
2021
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Öz: Kamu hizmetinde istihdam edilen personeller, 657 Sayılı Devlet Memurları Kanunu’nun 4. maddesinde üç fıkra halinde sayılmıştır. Bu madde çerçevesinde kamu kurum ve kuruluşlarında; Memur, Sözleşmeli Personel ve İşçi olmak üzere üç türde istihdam şekli öngörülmüştür. Ancak; Kanunun, işçileri düzenleyen 4/(D) hükmüne eklenen bir cümleyle, “işçiler” grubundakilerin, Devlet Memurları Kanunu’na tabi olmayacağı ifade edilmiştir. Bu kişiler, iş sözleşmesiyle istihdam edilen ve işe girişleri, yükselmeleri ve işten ayrılmaları bakımından İş Kanunu’na tabidirler. Bu ayrımın bir sonucu olarak, aynı kamu kurumunda çalışanlardan bir kısmı Devlet Memurları Kanunu’na, bir kısmı da İş Kanunu’na tabi olabilmektedir. Bu durum, en tabii kadın hakkı olan annelik konusunda; doğum sonrası izin süreleri, işe geri dönüş şartları ve işe geri dönüşte çalışma koşulları bakımından bu iki kanun arasında ciddi eşitsizlikler söz ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Özellikle de toplumsal cinsiyet algısının sonucu olarak, İş Kanunu’na tabi çalışan kadın personel, ücretsiz izni de bittikten sonra, çocuğu ile kariyeri arasında tercih yapmak zorunda kalacaktır. Böylesi ikilemlerde; kadının, toplum tarafından kendine biçilmiş bulunan “annelik” konumuna hapsedilmesi gündelik hayatta çokça karşılaşılan bir durumdur. Nihayet her iki kanunda da ücretli doğum izni, erkek ebeveyn için çok daha az bir süre için verilmektedir. Çalışmamızda, işte mevzuat kaynaklı bu eşitsizlikler ortaya konmaya çalışılacak, yapılması gerekenler konusundaki çözüm önerilerimiz sıralanacaktır.
Öz: Public service employees are classifi ed into three paragraphs in article 4 of Civil Servants Act Number 657 as being civil servants, contracted personnel and public service workers according to the way they are employed. However, an amendment to article 4 (D) of the same Act specifi es that those who fall within the category of public service workers are excluded from the scope of its application, because their employment contract and its provisions for recruitment, promotion and redundancy are subject to labour law. As a result of this separation, it may well happen that despite working for the same public employer, the employment terms and conditions applicable to some are regulated by the Public Servants Act, while others’ employment terms and conditions are governed by an entirely diff erent set of provisions under the Labour Act, causing inequality. The inequality is much more apparent in maternity rights at work, in particular the start and end of maternity leave, return to work following maternity leave, health and safety risks to pregnant worker or mother at work place. Commonly, as a result of societal gender bias woman workers whose employment is subject to labour law rather than the law of civil service are unfairly driven by a prejudicial perception into making a choice between caring her new born and having a professional career upon return to work from maternal leave. Finding herself in such a dilemma, a woman employee is forced by the social bias and sexism into “motherhood” as part of daily occurrence in the community. In addition, neither of these two acts concerning civil servants and labour provide equal or adequate paternity leave and pay. Our work fi rst aims to highlight such inequalities, inadequacies and shortcomings in the aforesaid statutes and then suggests what is legally required to overcome them.
Öz: Public service employees are classifi ed into three paragraphs in article 4 of Civil Servants Act Number 657 as being civil servants, contracted personnel and public service workers according to the way they are employed. However, an amendment to article 4 (D) of the same Act specifi es that those who fall within the category of public service workers are excluded from the scope of its application, because their employment contract and its provisions for recruitment, promotion and redundancy are subject to labour law. As a result of this separation, it may well happen that despite working for the same public employer, the employment terms and conditions applicable to some are regulated by the Public Servants Act, while others’ employment terms and conditions are governed by an entirely diff erent set of provisions under the Labour Act, causing inequality. The inequality is much more apparent in maternity rights at work, in particular the start and end of maternity leave, return to work following maternity leave, health and safety risks to pregnant worker or mother at work place. Commonly, as a result of societal gender bias woman workers whose employment is subject to labour law rather than the law of civil service are unfairly driven by a prejudicial perception into making a choice between caring her new born and having a professional career upon return to work from maternal leave. Finding herself in such a dilemma, a woman employee is forced by the social bias and sexism into “motherhood” as part of daily occurrence in the community. In addition, neither of these two acts concerning civil servants and labour provide equal or adequate paternity leave and pay. Our work fi rst aims to highlight such inequalities, inadequacies and shortcomings in the aforesaid statutes and then suggests what is legally required to overcome them.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynak
Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
25
Sayı
1
Künye
TAHTALI M. B (2021). TOPLUMSAL CİNSİYET ALGISI BAĞLAMINDA KAMU
KURUMLARINDA İSTİHDAM EDİLEN MEMUR VE İŞÇİLERİN
EBEVEYNLİK KAYNAKLI İZİN HAKLARINA İLİŞKİN
KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR DEĞERLENDİRME. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1), 471 - 512. Doi: 10.34246/ahbvuhfd.871314
